1 . How often are students absent from school? Are they ready for college? Is their school a welcoming place? States are beginning to plan new ways to grade their schools. Under the new law, states are paying more attention to whether students are getting better at school. They will not only look at whether students have achieved a certain level of understanding in reading and maths, but also see whether students have improved over time.
Mike Petrilli, the president of an organization that supports education, said the new law was different from the No Child Left Behind Act, the earlier education law. “It will be a fairer way to measure school quality,” he said. With the No Child Left Behind Act, schools were measured(评价)by how well students did on tests. If students did not do well, their schools would often get less money from the government. The new law gave states more choice about how their schools should be measured.
So far, nine states have given their plans to the National Education Department, while seven other states are completing them. When checking school quality, states are experimenting with new measures. Almost all of the early states have considered absences as a key measure, which counts how many students are absent from school more than one-tenth of the school year.
Connie and Delaware will track college preparation. They will see whether high school students are taking advanced classes. At the same time, they will also see how well students do on tests to get into college. Tennessee wants to give every public school a grade from A to F, and the grade will consider how well English learners are doing. It also will look at whether disabled students are being served. In addition, the schools will also be graded by whether students are ready for college, as well as how many students graduate.
Marc.Magee, an official of an education group, said, “there are so many differences in how states want to examine their schools. Then comparing states to each other could be difficult.”
1. According to the passage, the No Child Left Behind Act_______.| A．doesn’t care about the quality of education |
| B．pays more attention to students’ scores |
| C．forces schools to give up students’ physical practice |
| D．encourages the government to give schools more money |
| A．Students’ scores are not important. |
| B．Schools have to provide Chinese lessons. |
| C．Schools’ grades are related to college preparation. |
| D．The more students graduate, the more money schools will get. |
| A．Comparison among schools should be called off. |
| B．Students may be doubtful about the new law. |
| C．The new law will have a long way to go. |
| D．States should be given equal rights. |
| A．Objective(客观的) | B．Hopeful | C．Doubtful | D．Uninterested |
2 . Fear, anxiety, panic — those are the words Elaine Peng used to describe the state of her service’s recipients (接受者) who are fighting mental health problems through lectures and support groups on WeChat. President Donald Trump’s transaction (交易) ban on the social networking app has worsened their emotional state.
Since Peng founded the organization in 2013 with the mission of raising mental health awareness within the Chinese community, she has gradually built up her network. Now she has two WeChat groups of more than 500 people, including service recipients and volunteers.
Peng said, “WeChat is the organization’s primary communications tool because it is much friendlier than other US-developed apps. We also respond to emergency situations through WeChat. For instance, we recently rescued a patient from a parking lot, using the app’s real-time location feature, where his condition suddenly worsened and he didn’t know where he was,” she said.
Seeing that her group’s mission and operation will be affected in a significant way, Peng joined a legal challenge filed by the nonprofit US WeChat Users Alliance, seeking to block the ban. The presidential executive order does not define the word “transaction”, and Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross has not defined which particular transactions would be illegal. Ross may issue the definitions by Sunday, or he may not say anything for a long time, but the situation is already harming people who depend on WeChat. If the judge does not prevent the order from taking effect, then the law goes into effect Sunday, and no one knows exactly what it means.
We Chat has roughly 19 million daily active users in the US, most of them of Chinese descent, according to the complaint filed by the plaintiffs (原告) last month. The lawsuit argues that the order is illegal because it violates (侵犯) users’ free speech rights. It also argues that the ban targeted Chinese Americans, who rely on the app for work, worship and staying in touch with relatives in China.
1. In which section of a newspaper may this text appear?| A．Entertainment. |
| B．Science. |
| C．Education. |
| D．News brief. |
| A．To arouse mental health awareness. |
| B．To build up her network. |
| C．To provide service for recipients. |
| D．To keep in touch with relatives. |
| A．Subjective. |
| B．Objective. |
| C．Indifferent. |
| D．Doubtful. |
| A．Wechat ban-users’ expectation |
| B．Wechat ban-users’ demand |
| C．Wechat ban-users’ concern |
| D．Wechat ban-users’ disaster |
China’s two sessions( 两 会 ), a key event on the country’s political calendar,
Apart
First and the foremost, the world will keep an eye on how China builds a prosperous society and achieve
In 2019, China achieved a GDP
In the two sessions, national lawmakers and political advisers will be discussing how to make advances in economic development while implementing regular epidemic prevention,
Meanwhile,
4 . This month, Germany’s transport minister, Alexander Dobrindt , proposed the first set of rules for autonomous vehicles(自主驾驶车辆）.They would define the driver’s role in such cars and govern how such cars perform in crashes where lives might be lost.
The proposal attempts to deal with what some call the “death valley” of autonomous vehicles: the grey area between semi-autonomous and fully driverless cars that could delay the driverless future.
Dobrindt wants three things: that a car always chooses property(财产）damage over personal injury; that it never distinguishes between humans based on age or race; and that if a human removes his or her hands from the driving wheel — to check email, say — the car’s maker is responsible if there is a crash.
“The change to the road traffic law will permit fully automatic driving,” says Dobrindt. It will put fully driverless cars on an equal legal footing to human drivers, he says.
Who is responsible for the operation of such vehicles is not clear among car makers, consumers and lawyers. “The liability(法律责任）issue is the biggest one of them all,” says Natasha Merat at the University of Leeds, UK.
An assumption behind UK insurance for driverless cars, introduced earlier this year, insists that a human “ be watchful and monitoring the road” at every moment.
But that is not what many people have in mind when thinking of driverless cars. “When you say ‘driverless cars”, people expect driverless cars.” Merat says “You know — no driver.”
Because of the confusion, Merat thinks some car makers will wait until vehicles can be fully automated without operation.
Driverless cars may end up being a form of public transport rather than vehicles you own, says Ryan Calo at Stanford University, California. That is happening in the UK and Singapore, where government-provided driverless vehicles are being launched.
That would go down poorly in the US, however. “The idea that the government would take over driverless cars and treat them as a public good would get absolutely nowhere here,” says Calo.
1. What does the phrase “death valley” in Paragraph 2 refer to?| A．A place where cars often break down. | B．A case where passing a law is impossible. |
| C．An area where no driving is permitted. | D．A situation where drivers’ role is not clear. |
| A．stop people from breaking traffic rules. | B．help promote fully automatic driving. |
| C．protect drivers of all ages and races. | D．prevent serious property damage. |
| A．It should get the attention of insurance companies. |
| B．It should be the main concern of law makers. |
| C．It should not cause deadly traffic accidents. |
| D．It should involve no human responsibility. |
| A．Singapore | B．the UK | C．the US | D．Germany |
5 . Federal laws have been in place to protect archaeological (考古学的) resources for more than a century.
Yet theft, vandalism, and looting continue to pose serious threats to our cultural resources, and land managing agencies, tribal communities, and others are faced with the challenge of protecting heritage sites. A 2010 National Park Service report revealed that more than 3,000 cases of vandalism and looting on federal lands were documented within a 3-year period, and many more are likely unreported. Destructive behaviors range from the harmful act of artifact collecting to the criminal activity of looting and grave robbing.
Ancestral sites and surface artifacts are abundant in the Southwest. These material remains maintain connections to ancient traditions and cultural identity.
| A．It is of primary importance to work with local police. |
| B．Signs of these activities are found across the landscape. |
| C．Therefore, they are of cultural and spiritual importance. |
| D．There is no single or easy solution to this serious problem. |
| E．They serve as significant contributors to local and national economies. |
| F．The Antiquities Act, passed in 1906, was the first measure taken to preserve sites. |
| G．It forbids the damage to archaeological resources on public lands without a permit. |
6 . If you feel like you can’t even consider consuming a candy bar without being shown its caloric content, you’re right. The same thing goes for just about every piece of packaged food, plus every bottled or canned beverage: A Nutrition Facts label shows detailed information on the amounts of fat, sugar, sodium and more found inside.
But while your favorite breakfast cereals, sodas and sandwich fixings are subject to this type of in-your-face requirement, you may have noticed that booze(酒)is typically off the hook, so what gives?
The answer lies in the powers that be. While the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the safety of food, including non-alcoholic beverages, it doesn’t govern the alcohol industry. That honor belongs to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), an agency that doesn’t require labeling.
While beer, wine and spirits companies aren’t legally required to print the nutritional information on their products, consumer advocates have been calling for the TTB to change that. And it has, sort of. In 2013, the agency made nutrition labels optional for alcohol. But some health experts don’t feel the move was bold enough.
As John Hopkins, a public health researcher said her work revealed that the average American regularly consumes 400 calories a day from alcohol alone and they should know that.
The reasons behind the differences in label requirements between the FDA and TTB go back to Prohibition. When the ban on the production and distribution of alcohol came to an end, Congress passed the Alcohol Administration Act of 1935, which eventually led to the establishment of the TTB. Its rules around labeling have historically been a bit messy. Substances that people might be sensitive to have to be labeled, but other ingredients do not.
Change is brewing though, at least in the beer industry: Industry leaders, which produce more than 81 percent of the volume of beer sold in the U.S., have agreed to voluntarily display nutrition facts by 2020.
1. What is the function of the example given in the beginning?| A．To stress the importance of the topic. |
| B．To improve readers’ awareness. |
| C．To criticize the wrongdoings of some people. |
| D．To lead to the topic to be discussed. |
| A．Disobeying the related requirements. |
| B．Choosing one’s favorite ones. |
| C．Listing the nutrition labels. |
| D．Changing their routines. |
| A．The companies don’t necessarily do so by rules. |
| B．The companies didn’t know how to do. |
| C．The companies chose to break the rules. |
| D．The management of the companies is too messy. |
| A．All the alcohol drinks will add nutritional labels. |
| B．The majority of beer producers will use nutritional labels. |
| C．The beer industry leaders will remove nutritional labels. |
| D．The messy situation about the regulations will be completely solved. |
7 . Drivers who drive a little too close to cyclists on the road could soon be caught on the spot. A new technology adopted by legal departments in Ottawa could help carry out legal distance between bikers and cars on the road.
The device, which is fixed on a bicycle’s handlebars like a bike bell, uses sonar(声呐) technology to measure the distance between the bike and passing cars. The device will make a loud noise if the car is within one meter of the bike, the legal limit in the city of Ottawa, allowing the police rider to radio ahead to his colleagues so that the driver can be pulled over. “The safety of all road users is extremely vital, including cyclists. These cycling changes are directed at encouraging cycling, promoting road safety, and sharing the road,” said Rob Wilkinson, coordinator of the Safer Roads Ottawa Program.
The authorities started the program last week with a single sonar device. One police officer rode the bike bearing the device around the city on Tuesday to prove the effectiveness(有效性) of the technology. Within a few minutes of riding, the device was beeping, registering that two drivers had violated the one-meter distance requirement. The drivers were pulled over and given brochures informing them that they had broken the safe distance law.
Wilkinson noted that the device is not currently being used to issue fines, which can go up to $110, and that there are no plans to use it for enforcement(执法)in the future. At this point, its main use is to spread awareness about the safe distance law, which was passed last September in an effort to encourage rider safety and reduce deadly crashes.
1. What will happen if the safe distance is beyond the legal limit?| A．The cyclist will soon be caught on the spot. |
| B．The police will make the driver stop by the road. |
| C．The driver will be arrested for driving too fast. |
| D．The device will at once call the police of itself. |
| A．To make the bicycle attractive. | B．To encourage people to walk. |
| C．To guarantee road safety. | D．To warn drivers of danger. |
| A．Making a loud noise. | B．Receiving an urgent message. |
| C．Sending a stop signal. | D．Radioing the police rider. |
| A．It is being developed at present. | B．It still has room for improvement. |
| C．It may be used to fine drivers later. | D．It helps reduce traffic accidents. |
8 . Just how much does the Constitution(宪法) protect your digital data? The Supreme Court will now consider whether police can search the contents of a mobile phone without a warrant (授权令) if the phone is on or around a person during an arrest.
California has asked the justices to restore the practice that the police may search through the contents of suspects’ smartphones at the time of their arrest. It is hard, the state says, for judges to assess the implications of new and rapidly changing technologies .
The justices would be careless if they followed California's advice. They should start by rejecting California’s weak argument that exploring the contents of a smart phone is similar to say, going through a suspect's wallet. The court has ruled that police don't offend against the Fourth Amendment(修正案) when they go through the wallet of an arrestee without a warrant. In fact, exploring one's smartphone is more like entering his or her home. A smartphone may contain an arrestee's reading history, financial history, medical history and comprehensive records of recent correspondence.
Americans should take steps to protect their own digital privacy and should avoid putting important information in smartphones. But keeping sensitive information on these devices is increasingly a requirement of normal life. Citizens still have a right to expect private documents to remain private and protected by the Constitution's prohibition on unreasonable searches.
In many cases, it would not be very difficult for authorities to obtain a warrant to search through phone contents. They could still trump(打出王牌) the Fourth Amendment protections when facing severe and dangerous circumstances, such as the threat of immediate harm, and they could take reasonable measures to ensure that phone data are not deleted or altered while a warrant is on the way. The justices, though, may want to allow room for police to cite situations where they are entitled to more flexibility.
But the justices should not swallow California's argument whole. New technology sometimes demands fresh applications of the Constitution's protections. Orin Kerr, a law professor, compares the explosion and accessibility of digital information in the 21st century with the establishment of automobile use as a digital necessity of life in the 20th. At that time, the justices had to explain new rules for the new personal domain(领域) of cars. Similarly, the justices must sort out how the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution applies to digital information now.
1. The author’s attitude toward California’s argument is _____________.| A．skeptical | B．tolerant |
| C．indifferent | D．disapproving |
| A．getting into one's residence | B．handing one's historical records |
| C．scanning one's correspondences | D．going through one's wallet |
| A．principles are hard to be clearly expressed |
| B．citizens' privacy is not effectively protected |
| C．phones are used to store sensitive information |
| D．the court is giving police less room for action |
| A．the Constitution should be implemented flexibly |
| B．Principles of the Constitution should never be changed |
| C．New technology requires reinterpretation of the Constitution |
| D．California's argument violates principles of the Constitution |
9 . We talk a lot about air pollution. Here in Hong Kong we always complain about light pollution as well. Then, there is noise pollution. It's the same in many cities around the world. In Kathmandu, the capital city of Nepal, people have been complaining about/the noise made by drivers who continually sound their car horns(喇). That is until recently, when something was finally done about it.
The Chief District Officer of Kathmandu had received many complaints about horn pollution. He said that everyone felt the use of the car horn in recent years had become excessive. Researchers in Kathmandu found that for about 80 percent of the time, it really was not necessary for drivers to use their car horns. Sounding the horn to make a noise had become more of a habit. It was no longer being used as it was supposed to be used: to warn people of danger.
At the beginning of the Nepali New Year in 2017, the local government passed a law to ban the use of car horns unless used correctly.
Within six months, 11,000 fines(罚款) had been collected by the local traffic police. The e fine was about HK S360. A taxi driver in Kathmandu can make about HK S1, 000 per day, so he could lose about one-third of his money if he broke the law.
As usual, there were many complaints from drivers. They said that cows and dogs were free to walk on the roads. They always caused danger. Sounding a car horn was the only way to get them to move out of the way. And although there were quite a few traffic lights in the streets of Kathmandu, very few of them worked. This meant there was often a traffic mess.
The ban on using a car horn went ahead, and within a few weeks the streets of Nepal's capital were quieter-even though they were still just as busy. Because of the ban, drivers are a little more careful when they drive. Fewer accidents have been reported. The local government says the horn ban will now be copied in other areas of Nepal.
1. What do Hong Kong and Kathmandu have in common?| A．Both have been troubled by factory pollution. |
| B．Both have succeeded in fighting air pollution. |
| C．Both have been faced with the problem of noise pollution. |
| D．Both have received many complaints about horn pollution. |
| A．Car drivers usually use car horns unnecessarily. |
| B．The cars are becoming more and more. |
| C．Care drivers use car horns as a warning. |
| D．Everyone complain about the horn pollution. |
| A．In 2016. | B．In 2017. |
| C．ln 2018. | D．In 2019. |
| A．No traffic lights in the streets can work. |
| B．The traffic on the roads is usually very heavy. |
| C．Animals are not allowed to walk on the streets. |
| D．Drivers are required to drive on one-way streets. |
| A．It is unfair. | B．It is worrying. |
| C．It is interesting. | D．It is successful. |
10 . Some Facts about Britain
School-leaving age
Children have to stay at school until the age of 16. There is no upper age limit.
Alcohol
You have to be 18 to buy alcohol in a shop, but if you’re 16 and you’re having a meal in a pub, you can drink beer or wine with it.
Motor vehicles
16-year-olds can ride a motorbike of up to 50 cc. At 17 you can ride any bike or drive a car.
Smoking
You can smoke cigarettes at any age, but you can’t go into a shop and buy them until you are 18.
Armed forces
Men can join the army at 16, women at 17. If you’re under 18, you need your parents’ permission.
Marriage
You can get married at 16 with your parents’ permission. Otherwise you have to wait till you’re 18.
Paid employment
You can take a part-time job at 14, and a full-time job at 16 (i.e. when you’ve left school).
Entering Parliament(议会)
The minimum age for becoming a Member of Parliament is 21.
1. What is the passage mainly about?| A．People and employment. | B．Children and smoking. |
| C．Age and the law. | D．Safety and traffic. |
| A．take a part-time job | B．drink beer or wine |
| C．drive a car | D．buy cigarettes |
| A．16 | B．17 | C．18 | D．21 |
| A．people can get married at 18 |
| B．people can buy alcohol in a shop at 16 |
| C．children have to study at school until 18 |
| D．a girl of 17 can join the army without asking her parents |
